Dr_No

Apologies if this is an incorrect place to ask, but: How can multiple LUT files be selected and removed from Photo v.1? At present, I can only remove ones I don't use (or use infrequently) only by selecting the LUT and clicking ‘remove’ (or 'delete'). That's fine for single LUTs, but when they're part of a LUT package that was installed, it's a bit sticky wonking them out one at a time. Please advise if they can be group-selected (how to do that would be appreciated, too) and then deleted in one swell foop. Thanks to all for your advice and recommendations.

Thanks to all for your suggestions and informed input …

Dan … I don't know which LUT file format was selected to import. I've never had problems with any of them, but my usual imports into v.1 are .3dl and .look; sometimes .cube.

Hi, Dan … Installation steps given are as follows: Select ‘LUT’ > click > click ‘Import LUTs’ > navigate to the desktop folder that has the LUTs > open the folder > select the LUTs to install > click ‘Open’. Those are the same steps I use when installing LUTs in my v.1 Photo. I've had no problem. Your thoughts?

Hi, Walt … I screencapped the steps I use to add LUTs to my v.1 Photo and sent them to him to use for his installation. He replied that he got the ‘file not supported’ msg. Question: Is there any difference installing LUTs into v.2 Photo that didn't exist in v.1? It seems that process should remain a constant between versions, yes? Thanks again.

Hello again to all … I'm still using v.1 of Photo, but a friend is using v.2 (macOS) and can't install a LUTs set I sent him. He got the msg ‘file not supported’. I don't know which type of LUT he was installing (.3dl,cube, etc). Is there a difference in the method of installation between the two versions, or is v.2 more selective as to what type of LUT file it allows? I don't understand why he can't install them, since v.1 has always accepted any LUT type I've introduced to it. All thoughts and comments about possible cause(-s) and solution(-s) are welcome. Thanks in advance.

Hello again … and no, I am still unable to import actual PS styles. Since the time of my original post, Affinity have intro'd V2 of Photo, which unfortunately will not comport nicely with my macOS 'Sierra' (10.12.6). I have tried Walt's suggestion and, yes, it partially 'works', but there are still gaping holes left in the Satisfaction Quotient. Perhaps when I decide to (ahem) 'upgrade' my system and move up to V2, there will be a Happy Little Surprise awaiting me. That day, however, is still in future. In the interim, I must therefore spin my wheels and (when necessary) use PS to achieve the 'look' I want rather than the 'look' imposed on my text by a lack of 1:1 equivalence. That being said, I still prefer Photo to PS.

skybound13 … Yes, I realise macOS ‘Sierra’ is not a supported OS. It's why I cannot at this time upgrade to V.2. I still use many 32-bit apps that will break with an upgrade to a higher-version OS, and I'm not willing to take that hit at present. In future I may install a higher APFS-based macOS in place of the present Extended & Journaled OS ‘Sierra’, but as of now that's not an option. Depends on how much I need to give up in exchange for what I get in return … as of now, the trade-off's not acceptable. That may change.

skybound13 … please ignore prior query. Read too quickly but not far enough. Thanks …

skybound13 … interesting. At Step Nr 05, it appears to my wondering eyes that continuation will then create a ‘new’ PP account. Would that be a reasonable conclusion?

Hi, skybound13 … what is the mechanism that allows ‘guest payment’ thru PayPal? This is the first I’ve heard of that option. As previously mentioned, my only card is Discover. I have no Visa, AmEx, M'Card etc etc. Don't want, don't need, don't have. I also have no ATM or debit card. Same reasons. The trust level for both is at zero or less. My bank issued me one when I began doing business with them years ago. I directed them to introduce it to Mr. Shredder. I much prefer going to the inside window and chatting up the tellers. More personal. I will check the link you’ve provided, tho’ … might be the problem-solver. Thanks again.

Hi, StevenS … thanks for such a prompt and direct response. I will not be purchasing Affinity’s new wares, then. Sorry about that. I do not have - nor do I want to have - a Visa or MasterCard. I believe in the principle of ‘Fewer Credit Cards are Better’. I closed my PayPal account some months back, and that is no longer an option. I conduct no business thru the AppStore or the Microsoft Store, therefore whatever number or type(-s) of payment options they offer are completely irrelevant to me, as I'll never use them. Much as I'd like to upgrade to the new wares, I refuse to do so until the Portal Provider decides that American and Canadian Discover cards are equally valid means of making a purchase as its other preferred providers. Thanks again for your prompt response to my query. Richard (Dr_No)

It has come to my attention that V.2 of the Affinity Suite of wares can no longer be purchased if one chooses to use a Discover credit card. 1. Is this, in fact, the reality of the situation regarding purchase of V.2? 2. If so, why does Affinity no longer accept the Discover card? I purchased all wares of V. 1 and have no PayPal account now - only Discover. If Discover is no longer acceptable for purchase of the new wares, which cards are now in the category of ‘Officially Sanctioned’? I had planned to acquire all three V.2 releases of the wares after upgrading my now-incompatible OS (‘Sierra’). I have now put that on indeterminate (and possibly ‘terminal’) hold, depending on whether or not I can make the acquisition using my Discover card. Thank you for any explanation provided for the ‘desaperacido’ status of the Discover card vis-a-vis purchases of the new wares. Richard (Dr_No)

firstdefence and thomaso … Thanks for your examination of the Contour tool while we’re in this discussion of beveling and things associated with achieving a decent-looking bevel we can be proud to present to clients. The examples furnished by thomaso are excellent illustrations [sic] of why I no longer use the Contour tool - it's not predictable. As for rotten beveling being an accepted part of the effect, that's wide open for debate. Anyone remember Macromedia's Freehand MXa … ? Beautiful bevels. It also was the first (I believe) to introduce movable ‘paste inside’ shapes. After Adobe bought them, I hoped its best features would be incorporated into Illustrator but no … Adobe just wanted to kill the baby competitor in its crib. Perhaps more Affinity Design users can share their experiences with creating decent bevels without rounding … ? Thanks again.

firstdefence … Thanks for the heads-up on options like Blender. While being able to achieve the beveled result directly in-program would be the preferred option, there may ultimately be no way around avoiding the need to use a 3rd-party app. Alternatively, one can still use Illustrator to create the beveled type and (a) export it as a .png or (b) export it as a native .ai file and open that in Designer (all the while keeping fingers crossed that the attributes won't change in the process). thomaso … I’ve tried the Contour tool with very mixed results - and I can't pin down what precisely causes the inability to successfully replicate instances. It's more or less a ‘sometimes’ kind of tool — sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. In short: good concept, needs work.